If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Websleuths News

On the latest edition of Websleuths Radio we tackle the Rebecca Zahau murder case and the big mistake made in the autopsy report of the Las Vegas shooter.
CLICK HERE TO LISTEN

Photo of Arizona canyon sells for $6.5 million

The world's most expensive photo has sold for an eye-watering $6.5 million. It's a black and white photo of Antelope Canyon in Arizona, named 'Phantom', and the art reviewer at the link seems pretty outraged. He even goes so far as to say it's not art, just about. That's a risky thing to say in the art world, as very esteemed critics have tripped up doing that in the past.

I actually thought Peter Lik's photo was an x-ray until I read the description, so I'm not venturing an opinion. What do others think? Worth the money, or not?

Peter Lik is a talented photographer. "Phantom" is stunning, but is it worth that much?

Is Van Gogh's "Sunflowers" worth $90mil?

Granted, I don't understand all the nuances of investment art, but 6.5 sounds a bit high. Send me around the world to photograph the sames places in Lik's portfolio & I would come home with some decent shots. I don't suppose the undisclosed buyer who tossed down 10 million bucks this week on Lik's "pictures" would be interested in noZme originals.

Jonathan Jones statement in the Guardian article gives me a lot to think about. I'm not in 100% agreement, but it's humbling:Photography is not an art. It is a technology. We have no excuse to ignore this obvious fact in the age of digital cameras, when the most beguiling high-definition images and effects are available to millions. My iPad can take panoramic views that are gorgeous to look at. Does that make me an artist? No, it just makes my tablet one hell of a device.

The world's most expensive photo has sold for an eye-watering $6.5 million. It's a black and white photo of Antelope Canyon in Arizona, named 'Phantom', and the art reviewer at the link seems pretty outraged. He even goes so far as to say it's not art, just about. That's a risky thing to say in the art world, as very esteemed critics have tripped up doing that in the past.

I actually thought Peter Lik's photo was an x-ray until I read the description, so I'm not venturing an opinion. What do others think? Worth the money, or not?

That is stunning. It's like he's seeing through the stones to the spirit of the place.

I don't know whether I'd pay $6.5 million, though if Van Gogh's "Sunflowers" are worth $90 million, I guess that might be about the right scale. Art as investment, or as something personally owned, doesn't resonate with me. It seems like the best of art belongs to all of us and should be where we can all experience it...

Opinions expressed are strictly my own (who else would they belong to???)